Main menu

Randoms

Post navigation

Columbia Pictures has hired DaVinci Code screenwriter Akiva Goldsman to adapt Dan Brown’s ‘s “Angels and Demons”, another complex European potboiler about brainy Harvard professor of religious symbology Robert Langdon (i.e., Tom Hanks‘ DaVinci character) uncovering a dark plot. A Guardian story says that “no deals have yet been reached for Hanks and director Ron Howard to work on the film, but it is understood that both would have first refusal of the film.” Earth to Guardian: Hanks and Howard won’t come within ten city blocks of this thing. Their careers weren’t hurt by The DaVinci Code, but those $320 million worldwide DaVinci bucks aside, they sure as shit weren’t enhanced either. It’s possible Hanks and Howard enjoyed being mocked and torn down by critics and would like to repeat the experience, but I doubt it. Consider this “Angles and Demons” Amazon synopsis: “Harvard symbologist Robert Langdon is shocked to find proof that the legendary secret society, the Illuminati — dedicated since the time of Galileo to promoting the interests of science and condemning the blind faith of Catholicism — is alive, well, and murderously active. Brilliant physicist Leonardo Vetra has been murdered, his eyes plucked out, and the society’s ancient symbol branded upon his chest. His final discovery, antimatter, the most powerful and dangerous energy source known to man, has disappeared — only to be hidden somewhere beneath Vatican City on the eve of the election of a new pope. Langdon and Vittoria, Vetra’s daughter and colleague, embark on a frantic hunt through the streets, churches, and catacombs of Rome, following a 400-year-old trail to the lair of the Illuminati, to prevent the incineration of civilization.” I mean, good God!

For DaVinci Code, he essentially rewrote Angels & Demons, but took out everything that was so ridiculous that you wanted to throw the book across the room.
I’m pretty forgiving, but the “parachute” scene makes me want to cry—-so bad.

Nicol D

Won’t come near it?
Hollywood thinks Dan brown is a veritable documentarian on historical matters.
I suspect both Hanks and Howard will sign on by summer’s end.

Laura

“Dan Brown should sue Dan Brown for plagiarism”
Well done; thanks for the chuckle

TTurner

The great thing about the prequel idea is that they can recast the Hanks role with a younger actor. Even if the events of the book take place shortly before Da Vinci, the film could set the action a good decade or two earlier.
After all, isn’t everyone dying to see Colin Hanks as Young Robert (Bobby) Langdon?

Scotter

The prequel takes place something like 3 months before Davinci Code. But hell, why not, any excuse will do to dump a lead actor with a paunch and jowls.

Anonymous

I really think Hanks and Howard don’t care about critics or film snobs opinions. You can scoff at box office numbers if you like, (though you spend half your time talking about them) but there’s no denying that people are going to this movie. It’s buzz is not bad at all around regular movie going folks. I work at a movie theater and the only group that ever talks about critic’s reviews are seniors (60 years and up).

Matt

I really think Hanks and Howard don’t care about critics or film snobs opinions. You can scoff at box office numbers if you like, (though you spend half your time talking about them) but there’s no denying that people are going to this movie. It’s buzz is not bad at all around regular movie going folks. I work at a movie theater and the only group that ever talks about critic’s reviews are seniors (60 years and up).

lesterg

Brian Grazer?

Sean P.

Actually this film’s box office is even more impressive than you list: it’s worldwide total is now closing in on a half a billion in only its second week of release. $$463 million worldwide total so far.
Source:http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=14745
Sean P.

Anonymous

Yikes. And people keep saying that A&D is the better of the two books. Anyone would sign on to these films if they could get a percentage of the gross.

Anonymous

I really think Hanks and Howard don’t care about critics or film snobs opinions. You can scoff at box office numbers if you like, (though you spend half your time talking about them) but there’s no denying that people are going to this movie. It’s buzz is not bad at all around regular movie going folks. I work at a movie theater and the only group that ever talks about critic’s reviews are seniors (60 years and up).

Anonymous

Yikes. And people keep saying that A&D is the better of the two books. Anyone would sign on to these films if they could get a percentage of the gross.

cadavra

For what it’s worth, the Jack Ryan series didn’t suffer when Baldwin was replaced by Harrison Ford, and the 007s certainly haven’t been hurt by the turnovers. A&D will do business regardless of who plays Langdon.

delbomber

I haven’t read either book, but the whole “‘Angels and Demons’ is better” cry is born from snobbery. Avid readers–otherwise nice people–tend to be book snobs. Making the statement that the lesser known book was “better” is a way of telling you that a) they are well-read and b) they are fashionably untrendy